Crypto Lighthouse

Flare and Songbird reward deadlines

get_reward_deadlines

Read-onlyIdempotent

The next FTSO delegation reward deadlines on Flare and Songbird: when each closes, how many tokens are still unclaimed network-wide (they are burned at the deadline), and what the last deadline burned. Network totals only, not about any one wallet.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_reward_deadlines"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world status, so the description adds domain behavior instead: unclaimed tokens are burned at the deadline and the last burn amount is reported. That is genuinely useful context an agent would not get from annotations. It does not describe the response shape or time formats, which keeps it below a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single dense sentence, front-loaded with the resource and networks, followed by the returned data, then the scoping caveat. Every clause carries information; nothing is padding or restatement of the title.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter, read-only tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description supplies the scope, the returned fields in prose, and the burn-at-deadline behavior. An agent has everything needed to decide to call it and to interpret the result.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description correctly spends its words on scope and output content rather than inventing argument semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Names a specific resource (FTSO delegation reward deadlines) on specific networks (Flare and Songbird) and enumerates what the response contains: closing times, unclaimed network-wide tokens, and what the last deadline burned. The closing clause 'Network totals only, not about any one wallet' cleanly distinguishes it from wallet-scoped siblings such as check_claimable_rewards.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The negative scoping ('Network totals only, not about any one wallet') tells the agent precisely when this tool is the wrong choice, which implies the wallet-level alternative without naming it. It stops short of naming check_claimable_rewards explicitly, so the routing hint requires a small inference.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Crypto Lighthouse tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?